"Gamers" Are Still Dead, Y'all

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT
 

Even to this day I'm still amazed that gamers can't read far enough past the title to understand what writers always mean whenever they say "Gamers".

Well, not that shocked. It's basically the same people that kept GID alive.

irishda:
Even to this day I'm still amazed that gamers can't read far enough past the title to understand what writers always mean whenever they say "Gamers".

Well, not that shocked. It's basically the same people that kept GID alive.

You do know you are being as stereotypical by not reading what people are saying and just assuming your position in the matter. The article is shit

kenu12345:

irishda:
Even to this day I'm still amazed that gamers can't read far enough past the title to understand what writers always mean whenever they say "Gamers".

Well, not that shocked. It's basically the same people that kept GID alive.

You do know you are being as stereotypical by not reading what people are saying and just assuming your position in the matter. The article is shit

I already know what people are saying after reading through the first two pages, because it's the exact same shit they said three years ago. Except it's not just three years ago, it's the same shit people have been saying since likely the beginning of the first hobby. There's a hardcore sect that clings to some unknown dogma concerning how the hobby should, nay, MUST, be enjoyed, but the unspoken rules fluctuate so much it's almost like this sect really just wants to pretend they're special.

Then someone comes along and decries this exclusive sect, at which point the cult inflates their importance to that of the entire hobby and pretends this critic's comments are an attack on the hobby as a whole and not just on their pointlessly byzantine clubhouse that exists in a small corner of the hobby. So any valid criticism can get hand-waved away as the critic not being a "true [insert hobby title here]" or "they just don't understand".

There. I've just explained half the comments, and the other half is pointless debates on semantics or sniping between two users trying their best not to call the other a fucking knob.

But here's a better stereotype for you. It's usually the people with anime avatars that end up arguing from that walled-off sect.

irishda:

I already know what people are saying after reading through the first two pages, because it's the exact same shit they said three years ago. Except it's not just three years ago, it's the same shit people have been saying since likely the beginning of the first hobby. There's a hardcore sect that clings to some unknown dogma concerning how the hobby should, nay, MUST, be enjoyed, but the unspoken rules fluctuate so much it's almost like this sect really just wants to pretend they're special.

Then someone comes along and decries this exclusive sect, at which point the cult inflates their importance to that of the entire hobby and pretends this critic's comments are an attack on the hobby as a whole and not just on their pointlessly byzantine clubhouse that exists in a small corner of the hobby. So any valid criticism can get hand-waved away as the critic not being a "true [insert hobby title here]" or "they just don't understand".

There. I've just explained half the comments, and the other half is pointless debates on semantics or sniping between two users trying their best not to call the other a fucking knob.

But here's a better stereotype for you. It's usually the people with anime avatars that end up arguing from that walled-off sect.

Nothing you said is accurate to this thread. Perhaps you should get out of your ideological bubble and stop seeking ways to act smug

So, out of curiosity, I went and poked my head into a couple of off-site Gamergate haunts. Sure enough, this article has kicked up a hornet's nest.
In fact, I saw a couple of people suggesting the Escapist be put back on Gamergate's boycott list.

Ethics!

kenu12345:
Nothing you said is accurate to this thread. Perhaps you should get out of your ideological bubble and stop seeking ways to act smug

Well if you insist. Let's take a look at the very first page.

vallorn:

Of all the people you could quote, you picked an unhirable bufoon whose antics killed not only the brand of her site but also the acceptance of gaming in the wider culture by use of overblown hyperbole and outright lies? Yeah ok. I'll just be over here watching this article get 'critiqued'.

Wow look. "This person doesn't understand it". Bonus points for Alexander being the REAL reason gaming isn't accepted in wider culture.

crimson5pheonix:

No we don't. At least not the broad "cultural criticism". Saying you don't personally like Bayonetta's design is one thing, saying that her design is harmful brings up questions of "to whom?" and the answer is inevitably a bunch of nonsense of how these games represent all gamers or some such nonsense and shows that gamers only care about T&A or some such nonsense.

So the end result is a contradiction to another thing you said

That point is clearly what's being made. Because there are a lot of games that aren't "icky" or whatever, but what's important is that we stamp out women's power fantasies or whatever.

Another "this person doesn't understand" with a healthy dose of "conflating our importance to represent everyone".

Chaosian:
The fact this is being posted here of all places stretches credulity. It's October 1st that comes at the end of September, not April.
While the article's point is meh- harmless enough, even poignant in a few places, the title alone is practically inflammatory.

"This group equals everyone"

American Tanker:
"Gamers" never died. We're just in the process of respawning.

And when that's done, we'll purge the political bullshit from our games, and stand vigilant until the end of time to ensure it fucking stays out.

This guy bought the "we are the TRUE hobbyists" SUPER hard.

Naldan:
-snip-

Now this is some fine semantics splitting. "But what about toxic women? Doesn't that mean femininity is toxic too?"

StatusNil:
What, is it 2014 already? I wonder what great things this year has in store... Perhaps those nerds will finally be bullied into terminal submission? Then there will be dancing... with girls!

Yeah, we need precisely NONE more of this stuff, with all the rampant stereotyping and craving for validation. I've been supporting The Escapist for not throwing Leigh Alexander's stale venom in my face. Are these two interconnected things now subject to the chill winds of change?

In disbelief, a gamer.

Some more conflating. "Gamers are victims here to the bullying jocks/normies that just want to ruin our hobby"

Sweet, this is just the first few comments too. I'm sure the later posts swing this discussion in an entirely different direction.

CaitSeith:

https://mobile.twitter.com/russpitts/status/911978717077016576

That thread made some pieces fall into place about what happened here.

Susan Arendt, the EiC after Russ Pitts, has talked over the years about how shitty Macris and how it got to the point that she ended up with professionally diagnosed PTSD from having to deal with him as her boss. There's also all sorts of other statements out there that portray him anywhere from a slightly more assholish than usual boss to a maniacal, cackling would-be Bond villain. I've never heard an ex-employee say something positive about him after getting fired except for the generic "I want to give everybody a thanks for giving me a chance" speech and even with that he frequently was snubbed.

ScaredIndie:
Glad I didn't pay for pub club guess I will be sticking to other solutions for advertising when that ends. Might be time to start archiving in the future around here.

This is some delusional nonsense. Nobody in charge of this site actually cares enough to do anything for its health and the past year and a half should've exemplified that. Its a gaming news website with nobody to write secondhand articles about the most popular subjects or even type up one page game reviews for something that they were going to buy on day one anyways. The only reason to start archiving is because you want to be able to view the content again after the site inevitibly dies. Like most around here I figure Defy will probably let the domain expire and then shift Yahtzee to somewhere else that they already have lined up.

Mutant1988:
Bayonetta - 2009
Bayonetta 2 - 2014
Lollipop Chainsaw - 2012
Witcher 3 - 2015

I'm sorry, but are these games still hotly debated? If we are suppose to discuss present issues in the industry, would it not be appropriate to cite recent examples?

You know I wasn't gonna engage with the general discussion and just mostly poke fun at the death of the site instead but this is a serious issue as to why gaming culture is stagnant. I mean, a two year old game is too old to be cited as an example of industry trends, really? Its completely absurd. Gaming discussion has always had an issue of accessibility due to hardware being expensive and games being platform exclusive but saying that a two year old AAA games that was one of the most popular and celebrated games of the year in an already popular franchise is too old to merit being a valid example to discuss just sets a whole new low. Two years isn't even a full development period of a typical AAA game. Its kind of ridiculous how quickly the standards in the gaming community can shift with a complete disregard for the slower pace of game development and the high cost of entry for discussion. It makes serious discussion of games rather limited and sets very urealistic expectations for what games should be like, especially in regards to their graphics. I remember it being commonplace for people to say that Battlefield 3, the first game to use the vivid Frostbite 2 engine, had "shitty" graphics less than two years after release.

irishda:
Even to this day I'm still amazed that gamers can't read far enough past the title to understand what writers always mean whenever they say "Gamers".

Well, not that shocked. It's basically the same people that kept GID alive.

GID posters don't have to be your audience anymore. GID is over.

irishda:
The article is shit

Its pretty boilerplate actually. "Don't be an overdefensive shitpile and overreact when somebody makes a mild Youtube video making criticisms about a game you like."

As always, The Simpsons has something relevant to say in any given Escapist thread.

The real problem with this piece, and all the other "Gamers are Dead" pieces, is that it is just a drawn-out ad hominem fallacy that doubles as a strawman argument. Only big difference here is the author clearly is doing an homage to the original "Gamers are Dead" pieces without understanding their true meaning or intent and it is also much more terribly written even if we exclude the uncorrected typos. At any rate, I do feel people are being too harsh with The Escapist on this one. Hidalgo is just a mod who has occasionally contributed, but I don't believe he has ever been any kind of regular staffer. Basically, it is an op-ed and those can be written by anybody so long as it is coherent and not a lawsuit magnet. I do hope whoever is left still running the Escapist would be open to a response piece. None of the publications who pulled this back then did such a thing, so it would be a nice change.

IceForce:
In fact, I saw a couple of people suggesting the Escapist be put back on Gamergate's boycott list.

Why bother? There isn't anything left of the site to boycott.

TDA WP:
Hidalgo is just a mod who has occasionally contributed, but I don't believe he has ever been any kind of regular staffer.

To give due credit to Nuke there aren't any regular staffers on this site anymore.

Ninjamedic:
clip of an inexplicably popular sociopathic asshole character in an overrated TV show.

I take it you weren't alive when Night Trap got dragged in front of Congress?

BreakfastMan:

DaCosta:

Then again, given how they seem to know next to nothing about media and cultural criticism, maybe they complain because they think the "Gamers are dead" articles were about literally murdering gamers? They're not exactly geniuses is what I'm saying.

Nah, they are right, they were about literally murdering gamers. I was right there, following Zoe Quinn's orders during the Great Gamer Pogroms. I executed 30 myself. It was awesome.

Only 30? Dude, you were slacking! I oversaw the termination of that many on the first week! We who were placed so deep into the Gamer culture were waiting YEARS for our liberal overlords to finally make the streets run red with Republican white cis male blood in this sector!

IceForce:
So, out of curiosity, I went and poked my head into a couple of off-site Gamergate haunts. Sure enough, this article has kicked up a hornet's nest.
In fact, I saw a couple of people suggesting the Escapist be put back on Gamergate's boycott list.

Ethics!

lol, not like it would make much of a difference now. Also, are those people seriously still in their war mentality?

runic knight:
.

Funny how GamerGate wasn't a bit suspicious of right wing efforts even when they came right out and said they wanted to censor games, say.

irishda:

This guy bought the "we are the TRUE hobbyists" SUPER hard.

Didn't he though? I love it when people with less gamer cred than what I have in my pinkie finger tell me to GTFO on account of my politics.

Noooooo! What are you doing? You're gonna start Gamergate 2.0!

With a title like this, I was sure this was a WW thread.

Games "journalists" are still dead, y'all.

American Tanker:

DJJ66:
Do you want GamerGate? 'Cause this is how you get GamerGate.

#GamerGate never died. It's just not as obvious as it used to be...

But we are ever vigilant, opposing political bullshit where we see it.

I'm conflicted. While I tip my hat at your pro GG sentiments, I turn up my nose at your virulent anti-horse mentality.

maninahat:
So one of the creators of Dishonored 2 attributed his meeting with Anita Sarkeesian to his creative decisions to include more women in the sequels and have Emily as a playable character. By having the first game criticised, the creator realised that Sarkeesian had a valid point, took that point to the writing team of the next game, and they made a much better sequel as a result. I just finished playing Death of the Outsider, which has a black bisexual woman with disabilities as the protagonist. So tell me how has Sarkeesian stifled creativity in this instance? It seems like her wrods have helped make a better game.

"Better" according to who? Its metacritic scores were roughly equal to its predecessor; its sales numbers somewhat worse.

If the creator was inspired to make the option for Emily, bully for him, I guess, though I'll note the "enlightened" response of Ms. Sarkeesian was to wish that the male option had been omitted entirely- which is about the point I stopped feeling that her view was one that warranted much respect.

Was it "better" that time and resources were spent on the Emily route than on other things? I think that's a valid question- and one that the atmosphere bred by certain kinds of criticism make all but impossible to broach. And I'm not saying it wasn't, just that it would be nice to ask without "of course it was better, it was diversity, which is always better, and you're a misogynist if you dare ask the question" hanging over it.

Yes they do, just as much as I have every damn right to point out the flaws in those games. My criticisms could be valid, but that in no way means they have to go back and change the games to my whim even if I wanted it, nor does it mean that people can't like those games I criticised, nor does it mean I don't like those games I criticised.

Sure. But if you're doing so on a professional level, your comments very closely resemble the words of other professionals in the industry, and the attitudes reflected bear little resemblance to those of many of the greater consumer base who finance those games with their custom... It's not entirely surprising that some of those consumers would begin to resent that you were exerting a lot of pressure on creators in ways that were not only not reflected by their own wishes, but contrary to them.

The message alone isn't the problem. It's the desire to exercise coercive power through its repetition, often without making a case for the goal towards which it's used or the by what right it's exercised.

You literally could go a hundred years without hearing complaints about Quiet's costume: it really isn't hard to avoid critics talking about games, but then again that comes back to the main problem, which is that you just can't stand to hear people make certain types of complaints about games - it has nothing to do with your other arguments about whether these criticisms are even valid, just that you've decided you don't want to hear them, and that your strategy to devalue them is to paint the complainers as fascistic.

Yes, I could give up all interest in games, all interest in media related to games. I could divest myself of any and all stake in the medium's comings and goings, its direction and shape. I could go into the desert, perhaps join a monastery.

But since I'm not going to do that... How about this.

I deny that growing tired of hearing the same one-sided lines about "problematic" portrayals from multiple prominent sources is the main problem, or even my main problem.

Or even that I "can't stand" them, for that matter- I can stand them. Though I think less of their writers who trot them out so frequently, for so little reason, to so little effect. I'm tired of them using them without actually engaging in criticism- seriously engaging what this actually means, what effect it might actually have, how or if it might bear improvement, what "improvement" means and to whom. If someone isn't actually so much engaging their audience or their target as sending out a howl to their pack, they don't deserve that audience.

What they deserve is what they disingenuously claim to offer: pushback that urges them either do a better job, or get out of the game.

Which is why articles like this one giving them cover to keep doing the same damn thing they've been doing are so tiresome.

You do however see it as perfectly reasonable to complain about those people who complain, despite that being a self-contradicting argument considering they, as you say, don't have to do what you want.

Versus complaining about the people who complain about the people complaining?

For the record, they have the right to complain. So do you. So do I.

But where it creates a coercive atmosphere, I would urge creatives to push through it and make what appeals to them, whether that's Bayonetta or Gone Home. I urge them to defy those who criticize their choices with questions that aren't really questions and buzzword-strewn appeals to knee-jerk responses. And I would point out that many of our greatest artists have been "called out" by the moral police of their times.

Authority and power should not be given, or given away, so freely. They can say what they want- and I reserve the right to say, as warranted, that their appeals are shallow, their goals vague, their tactics questionable, and the power they seek to wield in the medium utterly undeserved.

For whatever tiny good or ill my own voice might give.

irishda:
Even to this day I'm still amazed that gamers can't read far enough past the title to understand what writers always mean whenever they say "Gamers".

Well, not that shocked. It's basically the same people that kept GID alive.

image

I'm waiting for the inevitable fan fiction tbh. Maybe a wild rumor about New Classic helping develop a sequel to a AAA game, believed because idiots will believe any anon thing on the chans.

TDA WP:
The real problem with this piece, and all the other "Gamers are Dead" pieces, is that it is just a drawn-out ad hominem fallacy that doubles as a strawman argument.

How can it be a strawman, when it doesn't accuse anybody of anything? How can it be an ad hominem if it doesn't address any specific individuals?

It describes as set of behaviours. If somebody does not engage in those behaviours, they are not the intended subject. That's simply not an ad hominem.

As with many of the original articles, a good number of people are willing to intentionally misconstrue the content in order to take umbrage.

The Article:
Women have a hard time pushing into game communities without the expectation to just tolerate the sexism already present

You mean that the shit-talking 12 year olds who have all fucked everyone's mom and try to find any way their feeble little minds than think of to insult people use a person's gender as a reference point to spew insults? Or are you trying to say that there are actually people who play video games who actually give a damn what bits you have between your legs? I really can't imagine you are saying the latter, and saying the first is like saying water is wet and pretending that men don't get similar remarks from the same twats (Like claiming only women get insults/death threats from people online which is fucking beyond utterly moronically retarded) so it can't be that one either because that would be dumb.

IceForce:
So, out of curiosity, I went and poked my head into a couple of off-site Gamergate haunts. Sure enough, this article has kicked up a hornet's nest.
In fact, I saw a couple of people suggesting the Escapist be put back on Gamergate's boycott list.

Ethics!

Wait, really?

*hurries over to KotakuInAction*

Oh, how positively delightful. I'm gonna have a lot of fun reading those comments, always get a good laugh out of them. Ahhh... nothing more entertaining than reading the salty comments of people who don't seem to know what a games journalist is.

Wrex Brogan:

Oh, how positively delightful. I'm gonna have a lot of fun reading those comments, always get a good laugh out of them. Ahhh... nothing more entertaining than reading the salty comments of people who don't seem to know what a games journalist is.

Mind the subreddits that automatically ban you for posting there, regardless of content.

And it's funny, it's so easy to just GO there, and most people who look down on them have never bothered. It's rather surprising that THAT tame little sub is somehow labelled as "enemies of women in gaming".

Hey remember y'all, when they had some soccer or hockey riot, and espn came out and said "sports fans are dead" to try to help the situation? Me neither.

Smithnikov:

Ninjamedic:
clip of an inexplicably popular sociopathic asshole character in an overrated TV show.

I take it you weren't alive when Night Trap got dragged in front of Congress?

And now we're supposed to entertain the opinions of the moralisers and accept them without question. Funny that.

Edit: You're all going off to reddit to look for boogeymen? Really? Are you all that desperate?

Holythirteen:

Wrex Brogan:

Oh, how positively delightful. I'm gonna have a lot of fun reading those comments, always get a good laugh out of them. Ahhh... nothing more entertaining than reading the salty comments of people who don't seem to know what a games journalist is.

Mind the subreddits that automatically ban you for posting there, regardless of content.

And it's funny, it's so easy to just GO there, and most people who look down on them have never bothered. It's rather surprising that THAT tame little sub is somehow labelled as "enemies of women in gaming".

Oh no, you misunderstand, I'm not going to post there. I have some standards, thank you very much. I just like to go there and laugh at the fact that, generally speaking, a lot of people there have a bug-bear about 'Tumblrinas', and then spend 160 comments getting triggered by a thread title. Fucking hilarious, that is.

And also because of the Escapist Users who shit-talk other users on there. That's so adorable.

I wouldn't say they're the enemies of women in gaming though. That requires some... well, competence on their behalf. They're more akin to the 'unpleasant bit of sticky gum you occasionally touch when you reach under a desk and go 'eeeuuugh' from the contact' of women in gaming.

Ninjamedic:

Smithnikov:

Ninjamedic:
clip of an inexplicably popular sociopathic asshole character in an overrated TV show.

I take it you weren't alive when Night Trap got dragged in front of Congress?

And now we're supposed to entertain the opinions of the moralisers and accept them without question. Funny that.

Edit: You're all going off to reddit to look for boogeymen? Really? Are you all that desperate?

Hey now, I'm going to look for Comedy, not boogeymen.

...unless there are comedic boogeymen out there as well. Dammit, you've put the idea in my head, now I gotta go check!

Anti-gamers are still the funniest people to watch having meltdowns, even after all this time.

I wonder if Yahtzee will finally want to leave the site after this one.

Wrex Brogan:

Hey now, I'm going to look for Comedy, not boogeymen.

Are you, because I see this cart being wheeled out by the exact same people again and again any time I pop back on the forums.

I think it says more about them than it does about any supposed set of internet bad guys.

TDA WP:
I do hope whoever is left still running the Escapist would be open to a response piece. None of the publications who pulled this back then did such a thing, so it would be a nice change.

More than a nice change, I'd say. The only chance to salvage something of positive value out of this sorry fumble. So The Escapist, whoever is in charge, needs to reach out to someone who both understands and actually approves of games, rather than using them as fodder for ideological posturing, to provide a response. Here's one candidate, veteran game developer Troy Leavitt, offering some thoughts:

There are others who could do the job out there too. Hell, many on here could do a job more than worthy of the original piece. Many of the comments in this thread are far more sound in reasoning than the article. So just ask someone for suggestions if you don't know any gamers in this "gaming media" racket.

Huh, it feels wrong to call this piece "original", even in context.

Ninjamedic:

Wrex Brogan:

Hey now, I'm going to look for Comedy, not boogeymen.

Are you, because I see this cart being wheeled out by the exact same people again and again any time I pop back on the forums.

I think it says more about them than it does about any supposed set of internet bad guys.

My first post in the thread was about how I haven't taken anything around here seriously for the last couple of months, so... yeah, it's about the comedy. At least for me, I ain't gonna guess anyone elses motivations. I'm just here for a laugh.

Wrex Brogan:

My first post in the thread was about how I haven't taken anything around here seriously for the last couple of months, so... yeah, it's about the comedy. At least for me, I ain't gonna guess anyone elses motivations. I'm just here for a laugh.

You don't need to guess, the amount of grasping as straws about trying to assume the differing opinions to the OP are just "salt" or people being defensive are enough to tell me how this is playing out.

It doesn't help that as a culture ourselves, we're so adverse to sexuality in many open forms. We'll let teens watch hyper-violent gun-toting trash without batting an eye, but we want to protect our youth from ever experiencing a nipple, an exposed breast, a vagina, testicles, penis, whatever. The censorship itself details what we can and can't see as individual objects of sexual desire. No wonder we fucking objectify.

Ninjamedic:
Edit: You're all going off to reddit to look for boogeymen? Really? Are you all that desperate?

You might want to avoid throwing those particular stones inside this glass house, because the gaters are the ones who did that first. They went out of their way to trawl the internet and seek out articles and opinion pieces to get offended by, even if those articles were published on websites they would never normally visit.

If we're going to be accusing people of seeking out and looking for boogeymen, the gamergaters themselves are the ones who need to step up on the podium and take that award, before anyone else.

IceForce:
]

You might want to avoid throwing those particular stones inside this glass house, because the gaters are the ones who did that first.

Hey, in this analogy, I'm sitting in the park in front of the ducks while those in the glass houses pelt stones.

TallestGargoyle:
We'll let teens watch hyper-violent gun-toting trash without batting an eye, but we want to protect our youth from ever experiencing a nipple, an exposed breast, a vagina, testicles, penis, whatever

I honestly can't understand where this is coming from. The only places in the West where hyper-violence is embraced are the same places nudity is as well. What America has isn't hyper-violence in its media, it has a bunch of guns going "bang bang" and "boom boom" very loudly. Just having a fist fight that results in a bit of blood is an automatic PG13, a gunshot wound that's realistic an automatic R. Hell compare Red Dawn to the remake and you'll see how far America has moved backwards in terms of how accepting it is of violence in media.

There isn't an acceptance of violence in the media in the US, there's an acceptance of the idea of violence, the abstract notion of it, but not the actual thing.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here